Looking for a training manual

My suggestion is a book by Hunter Allen and Andrew Coggan, Training and Racing with a Power Meter. Don't be spooked by the title. Even though the book is primarily targeted at power meter users, the training levels are also defined by heart rate and rate of perceived exertion. My main reason for recommending the book is the credentials of the authors. Hunter Allen is a highly regarded cycling coach. Andrew Coggan is a highly regarded exercise physiologist. Both authors are also competitive cyclists. Improving cycling fitness is all about creating physiological adaptations to your aerobic, anaerobic and neuromuscular capacities. Therefore, a deep understanding of the cause and effect of these adaptations is crucial. BTW, I have no relationship to the authors and derive no financial benefit from sales of the book.

As to your goal, that's a pretty ambitious target, but not unrealistic.

RapDaddyo said:

My suggestion is a book by Hunter Allen and Andrew Coggan, Training and Racing with a Power Meter. Don't be spooked by the title. Even though the book is primarily targeted at power meter users, the training levels are also defined by heart rate and rate of perceived exertion. My main reason for recommending the book is the credentials of the authors. Hunter Allen is a highly regarded cycling coach. Andrew Coggan is a highly regarded exercise physiologist. Both authors are also competitive cyclists. Improving cycling fitness is all about creating physiological adaptations to your aerobic, anaerobic and neuromuscular capacities. Therefore, a deep understanding of the cause and effect of these adaptations is crucial. BTW, I have no relationship to the authors and derive no financial benefit from sales of the book.

As to your goal, that's a pretty ambitious target, but not unrealistic.

I used that book and it helped a lot in improving my ability to stay in the field. I also have a power meter, but the 11 year old PowerTap yellow hub with a wired sensor. Everything is wireless now but I'm not looking to spend the same amount to upgrade. Online software like Zwift or Trainerroad will convert your speed on a regular trainer to power.

Thank you very much! I'll pick up a copy ASAP ☺

Chaos Driver said:

Thank you very much! I'll pick up a copy ASAP ☺

While you're waiting for the book to arrive, here's something to get you started written by one of the co-authors. http://freewebs.com/velodynamics2/traininglevels.pdf
The book will have much more detail.

Nice post thank u

workingguy said:

http://freewebs.com/velodynamics2/traininglevels.pdf

Just been looking at this link from [USER=108841]@workingguy[/USER] and see from the descriptions of each level that I am no where near L3 or L4 duration for that level of effort.

To get to that duration of level do I train at shorter duration but same effort, or longer duration lower level? Which is considered to better approach? My logic is the correct level of effort for shorter duration, slowly increasing.

Sorry for the newbie question but that is where I am at. Research I do on training and training programs appears to be written for people at a higher standard than I am currently.

You want to go at what ever intensity you can sustain for the duration. For example if your goal is to do intervals of 20 minutes at 200W (95% ftp), (with the assumption that your ftp is 215W) and you can't then you've over estimated your ftp and reduce the effort to say, 185-190. Any interval, whether 5-minute or 20-minute, should feel hard, like you almost can't finish the last 25% of it. When doing intervals it helps me to start just a few watts under my target power and by the end finish higher than the target power.

Andy Jennings said:

Just been looking at this link from [USER=108841]@workingguy[/USER] and see from the descriptions of each level that I am no where near L3 or L4 duration for that level of effort.

To get to that duration of level do I train at shorter duration but same effort, or longer duration lower level? Which is considered to better approach? My logic is the correct level of effort for shorter duration, slowly increasing.

Sorry for the newbie question but that is where I am at. Research I do on training and training programs appears to be written for people at a higher standard than I am currently.

Where you are at should not matter. The training protocols are based on your current level of fitness. In the beginning you will see rapid increases and then approach a leveling off, or plateau, period. Take a week of easy or even no bike, then you will come back and perhaps go beyond the plateau.

FWIW, my numbers are nowhere near those 300W guys you see on youtube. But the program still works for me...

many thanks Workingguy. Much appreciated.

I should have said that I am working from %MHR not watts. I am not even thinking about power meters at the level I am at currently. I have only got back in to cycling recently after 15 years of nothing due to illness.

workingguy said:

You want to go at what ever intensity you can sustain for the duration. For example if your goal is to do intervals of 20 minutes at 200W (95% ftp), (with the assumption that your ftp is 215W) and you can't then you've over estimated your ftp and reduce the effort to say, 185-190. Any interval, whether 5-minute or 20-minute, should feel hard, like you almost can't finish the last 25% of it. When doing intervals it helps me to start just a few watts under my target power and by the end finish higher than the target power.

What you state here makes perfect sense, although my logic was correct intensity, shorter duration.(I hadn't considerd an incorrect max intensity)

I would assume, in that case, that my estimated MHR, using the known to be inaccurate 220-age, is incorrect for me as well. I would not be at all surprised about this after so long as a couch potato.

Until I can justify the expense of a PM I will just have to go by %MHR and perceived effort to get the desired "Jeez I'm stuffed" result at the end of the effort. o_O

Good point about taking a break as well. I have been riding for 2-3 hours a day at a level that makes me moderatly tired at the end, split in to two rides. I may just need to back off and try again at the intervals. My main priority atm is health and calorie burn and that is why I have been riding so much.

Again thanks for the advice and guidance.

Andy Jennings said:

many thanks Workingguy. Much appreciated.

I should have said that I am working from %MHR not watts. I am not even thinking about power meters at the level I am at currently. I have only got back in to cycling recently after 15 years of nothing due to illness.

What you state here makes perfect sense, although my logic was correct intensity, shorter duration.(I hadn't considerd an incorrect max intensity)

I would assume, in that case, that my estimated MHR, using the known to be inaccurate 220-age, is incorrect for me as well. I would not be at all surprised about this after so long as a couch potato.

Until I can justify the expense of a PM I will just have to go by %MHR and perceived effort to get the desired "Jeez I'm stuffed" result at the end of the effort. o_O

Good point about taking a break as well. I have been riding for 2-3 hours a day at a level that makes me moderatly tired at the end, split in to two rides. I may just need to back off and try again at the intervals. My main priority atm is health and calorie burn and that is why I have been riding so much.

Again thanks for the advice and guidance.

Looking at the chart in the pdf, I've never used heart rate as a training intensity guide. I can't imagine holding 100% max heart rate for 20 minutes. I'd pass out before reaching 106% MHR let alone hold it for 5 minutes. And keep in mind for a any interval, your heart rate takes about a minute to ramp up to the desired intensity,

If you have the means to do it, getting a power meter would be the best investment you can make. Above getting bike bling, titanium frame, deep rim carbon wheels, etc.

The cheapest option would be to let software like trainerroad.com estimate your power. All you need is a garmin (or wahoo) speed sensor, ANT stick (looks like a wireless mouse usb plug), and a supported trainer. Total cost = $300. It may give you low or high estimate, but then base your training intensity on that estimate. Make sure your setup is consistent, ie, not changing from one workout to the next. I'm using this because although I have a power meter, it is the old wired one, it's not connected via ANT+. So I don't care if trainer road gives me too low an estimate, my threshold workout targets will be 95% of that estimate. Just have to remember to watch the computer screen instead of my own power meter. Trainer road is $12/month or $99/year much less than the cost of a gym.

This is what I mean. Trainer road estimated my ftp to be 166 (with 2 x 8-minute efforts) and sets my work interval efforts to be anywhere from 157-187 (race simulation) although my power tap was reading 190-210. Downloading my power tap data said that I averaged 194/198 for the 2x20 minute efforts. My trainer road W/kg would be much lower than others but what do I care... They are using $1200 Wahoo Kickr. That's the difference between precision and accuracy.

About a month ago I could not maintain 180 (powertap) for more than a couple minutes so I know the training works.

The trainer road UI is kind of like those exercise bike LEDs.

[ATTACH=full]1869[/ATTACH]

Many thanks for the inffo Workingguy.

workingguy said:

The cheapest option would be to let software like trainerroad.com estimate your power.

This is definitely a viable option for me. I have a Garmin computer already with a speed sensor, and I have been considering the benefits of a trainer just yesterday. so that makes it a good bet for me.

workingguy said:

Above getting bike bling, titanium frame, deep rim carbon wheels, etc.

At my weight (125 Kg) and current ability the "I want" items have no significance compared to the "I need items" to improve my ability to train. Shaving a couple of Kg off my overall weight is just not important, and for me quite possibly never will be.

To be honest I never even heard of many of the software and tracking options available no. I have had an enforced 15 years without cycling, due to illness, and I am a bit in the dark with all this. Hence the sometimes strange questions I am on the forum. lol.

Much appreciate the reply and I will start to look in to getting what I need.

Andy Jennings said:

Many thanks for the inffo Workingguy.

This is definitely a viable option for me. I have a Garmin computer already with a speed sensor, and I have been considering the benefits of a trainer just yesterday. so that makes it a good bet for me.

At my weight (125 Kg) and current ability the "I want" items have no significance compared to the "I need items" to improve my ability to train. Shaving a couple of Kg off my overall weight is just not important, and for me quite possibly never will be.

To be honest I never even heard of many of the software and tracking options available no. I have had an enforced 15 years without cycling, due to illness, and I am a bit in the dark with all this. Hence the sometimes strange questions I am on the forum. lol.

Much appreciate the reply and I will start to look in to getting what I need.

I had a self-imposed 6 year ban on cycling. I just read up on all this stuff in the last month. In 2008 I was racing against computer generated opponents using fitcentric software that sped up and slowed down randomly. Now zwift.com gives you real opponents all over the world 24x7, kinda like the Wii for cycling. With all the options now, that forced computrainer to lower their price down to $999 from $1500 several years back. Not sure that computrainer even supported a hundred real-time opponents.

I use both, zwift for the interactive racing action and trainer road for the pre-programmed workouts.

workingguy said:

I had a self-imposed 6 year ban on cycling. I just read up on all this stuff in the last month. In 2008 I was racing against computer generated opponents using fitcentric software that sped up and slowed down randomly. Now zwift.com gives you real opponents all over the world 24x7, kinda like the Wii for cycling. With all the options now, that forced computrainer to lower their price down to $999 from $1500 several years back. Not sure that computrainer even supported a hundred real-time opponents.

I use both, zwift for the interactive racing action and trainer road for the pre-programmed workouts.

These programs just sound better and better.

I like the idea of the real opponents as well.

Great info Thank you.

We've come a long way from this LOL
http://www.nesmuseum.com/racermate.html